20 comments to Understanding the Electoral College
prepare yourself for the cretins wanting to do away with the Electoral College. the system is inspired brilliance. Pure balance.
Then why haven’t any other countries copied the model, even after well over 200 years of observation?
To Mark- Said by the redneck from Bumf*ck Arkansas. (Just trying not to be PC any longer.) Why should people vote now if their vote doesn’t count? And don’t try to tell me it does, because clearly, for the second time in 16 years, it didn’t. I have friends in Oregon who didn’t bother voting because they know that Oregon is going to vote democrat, so their vote won’t matter. The Electoral College does not address this issue. Because of this, many voters are disenfranchised. The 46% of potential voters who didn’t vote speak, at least in part, to this issue.
If the world series had been scored by the number of hitters who achieved getting on-base to any base rather than just the number that made it all the way around to home, then the other team would have won. Therefore I think we should change baseball from this antiquated rule that only “home base” counts for scoring, and make any base count. This won’t change strategy at all, by the way, because the real-world does not have anything beyond first-order effects.
I signed a petition to get rid of the electoral college today. It’s ridiculous that the actual vote does not determine the winner.
Electoral college: the president is decided based on the allocation of seats in Congress, and elected from a handful of individuals in their respective states, many of whom have the unpunishable right to vote as they want, despite the expressed will of the people in their state, and without regard to how the peoples’ votes are distributed among the eligible candidates.
That doesn’t sound like democracy to me.
WE DO NOT LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY! Basic grade school civics- we live in a representative republic! I don’t recall any bitching about the electoral college when BHO won…
Because BHO won the popular vote too, both times, by a wide margin. What’s the point in complaining about the electoral college when its results match the popular vote? The people still got what they voted for. This year, not so much, just like in 2000, and we all know how well that turned out.
Representative republic is redundant. Therefore your answer is wrong.
If you want the most technical term, our country is a constitutionally limited representative democratic republic. In our form of government, the constitution limits the power of government. We elect representatives, so it’s not a pure democracy. But we do elect them by majority rule so it is democratic
I think it’s more important to establish a national right to vote… oh and bring back the teaching of Civics in schools.
Electoral College, it’s a good thing no matter what party affiliation. It’s obvious that no one watched the video. It’s always the losers who cry about Electoral College. Watch the video and if you don’t understand the words get someone two explain it to you, maybe a 10-year-old.
I watched enough of the video to recognize its right-wing bias, confirmed by looking at the home page of the producer.
This is the same video that the liberals use. Sad very sad
First of all Prager University is not an accredited academic institution and does not offer certifications or diplomas. Secondly, Dennis Prager, the founder, is a right winger. Thirdly, it is NOT the same video that the liberals use.
For fairness sake the argument against an Electoral College is here:
While its description of how many electors go to each state differs the rationale why it’s failing in its purpose makes sense.
Actually, upon further research, it looks as if my video is correct.
(C.A.I) This video is incredibly misleading,It only counts “cities” but not the suburbs around them which drastically increase the population size. For example. NYC is 8 million if you count just the city but 23 million if you count the metropolitan area. Plus the House represents the interests of the big states while the senate represents the interest of the small states. The electoral college is supposed to be a compromise between the two. The President cannot pass any law without the blessing of the House so I do not see what the issue is.
It only counts “cities” but not the suburbs
Perhaps you should watch the video before making an outright ludicrous statement. There is never one mention of a city. Every population number refers either to an individual state or the entire country. Never once to a city.
Plus the House represents the interests of the big states while the senate represents the interest of the small states
That’s how the government works. This video is speaking to how the intent of the electoral college actually doesn’t work.
The President cannot pass any law without the blessing of the House
That’s only half true. The Senate is the other half of that equation.
The issue is, you didn’t watch the video and yet you spoke of matters falsely plus showed a lack of understanding of how our government works.
Perhaps some don’t know the electors don’t have to cast their votes according to the vote totals of their state. At least, that was part of the original intent of the 12th Amendment.
The video doesn’t tell the real story about how the electoral college came about. It was Jefferson’s idea that he got from the early history of England (before the Roman invasion). There were tribes who would send wise elders to vote for a leader of all the tribes. Each elder was usually given a preferred name by his tribe, but was also under the freedom to change his vote based upon his wisdom. (“Hmmm, they told me to vote for Joe, but I think Eddie would make a more solid leader.”)
It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.
It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.
It would seem that the main purpose of the Electoral College has been failing us for years as intelligent, objective electors have not been the norm. These are people who were to be selected based on their ability to choose the most qualified candidate, not necessarily the most popular. The electors were to be free from any constraints or bribery so as to be able to make a choice based on their own observations and knowledge. They were not meant to be bound by a particular party or interest (other than what is best for the country). This is why the EC either needs reform or needs to go as its original purpose and intent is not being utilized.